Standing on principle vs. policy positions birthed out of wanting to disagree?

This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

View Poll Results: Is party policy driven by principle or desire to disagree?

Voters

5. You may not vote on this poll

Both

360.00%

Principle

00%

Being as active an opposition as possible and policy positions can be altered on the fly as required

240.00%

At times ones own party pursues out of sync agendas. Because its us we look the other way.

Standing on principle vs. policy positions birthed out of wanting to disagree?

I saw a commentator on one of the Sunday morning news shows say something I've believed for a few years. Paraphrasing: "[...one of the political parties] USED to be strongly is favor of a particular policy until their opposition started to favor it was well. Then they became opposed the very thing they policy they supposed only a few years ago." The implication: this party never really cared about XYZ issue or this did care but are so opposed to the other party, they are willing to disregard their own convictions for the sake of the "greater good" of disagreeing with everything their opposition favors. Either way, IMHO its petty and causes be to lose confidence in the political system where the leadership of the parties place their influence, however they wish to use it as long as its their influence, over the broader American interests? Are there any statesmen left or is the political arena filled with political hacks who only care about bring in charge and being in disagreement with the other party?

Is party policy driven by principle or desire to disagree?

Having opinions all over the map is a good sign of a person capable of autonomous thinking. Felix -2011

Re: Standing on principle vs. policy positions birthed out of wanting to disagree?

Without a specific example it is hard to comment on it, but to use that single allegation (assertion?) to imply a wiidespread treand is even more absurd. I may be for job creation and against a bill that tosses pork to fund silly projects that is presented as a jobs bill. I may be for cancer research and yet opposed to the use of double blind studies for cancer research.

“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

Re: Standing on principle vs. policy positions birthed out of wanting to disagree?

Originally Posted by ttwtt78640

Without a specific example it is hard to comment on it, but to use that single allegation (assertion?) to imply a wiidespread treand is even more absurd. I may be for job creation and against a bill that tosses pork to fund silly projects that is presented as a jobs bill. I may be for cancer research and yet opposed to the use of double blind studies for cancer research.

As I recall, it was a lot more specific than that.

Having opinions all over the map is a good sign of a person capable of autonomous thinking. Felix -2011

Re: Standing on principle vs. policy positions birthed out of wanting to disagree?

It has been my experience that the people who scream the loudest about standing on principle are the ones where they enjoy the luxury of having no consequences to any positions they may take. This is especially true of people outside of the two main parties.... outside of the mainstream ..... people whose politics and ideologies are on the outside margins and never have to worry about putting any of their ideas into action and thus are free from any consequences of them.

You see it here all the time with people who declare themselves as libertarian or who take far right libertarian positions. Its easy to say you condemn something like the power of eminent domain when you never have to run a nation or a state or a city or any community for that matter and never have to consider the realities of government services and functions.

__________________________________________________ _
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

Re: Standing on principle vs. policy positions birthed out of wanting to disagree?

Originally Posted by haymarket

It has been my experience that the people who scream the loudest about standing on principle are the ones where they enjoy the luxury of having no consequences to any positions they may take. This is especially true of people outside of the two main parties.... outside of the mainstream ..... people whose politics and ideologies are on the outside margins and never have to worry about putting any of their ideas into action and thus are free from any consequences of them.

You see it here all the time with people who declare themselves as libertarian or who take far right libertarian positions. Its easy to say you condemn something like the power of eminent domain when you never have to run a nation or a state or a city or any community for that matter and never have to consider the realities of government services and functions.

Oh yeah. I couldn't help but to notice with extremely few exceptions, the people complaining that they didn't want the government to "force them" to buy health insurance they didn't want all had health insurance themselves. IMHO the only people who could speak to that issue with any credibility would be the uninsured and those with insurance who voluntarily cancelled their policies.

Having opinions all over the map is a good sign of a person capable of autonomous thinking. Felix -2011